On Tue, 03 Jul 2012 09:51:50 -0700, Goo wrote:

>On Tue, 03 Jul 2012 12:42:05 -0400, dh@. wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 2 Jul 2012 12:50:12 -0700 (PDT), Rupert >
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Jul 2, 9:31*am, Delvin Benet ýt> wrote:
>>>> There is nothing inherently unethical about eating meat.
>>>
>>>Modern meat production inflicts considerable suffering on animals.
>>
>> What sort of suffering do you think it inflicts to the point that you feel
>>the animals' lives are not worth living to the animals? Explain in detail which
>>livestock lives you feel are not worth living for the animals and why. Don't
>>just say "suffering" but explain what the suffering is from.
>>
>>>It
>>>is not justifiable to inflict so much suffering just so that we can
>>>enjoy the taste of their flesh.
>>
>> As yet you have no argument whatsoever. On top of having no argument until
>>you produce examples of the types of suffering you're referring to, you also
>>have yet to appreciate when life is good for any animals other than grass raised
>>beef, and you can't decide whether you should be opposed to it or not. Also
>>grass raised dairy certainly seems like it should provide lives of positive
>>value not only for the cattle themselves, but also all the wildlife that
>>benefits from the environment. I believe it's safe to say that wildlife benefit
>>more from grass raised cattle farming than they do from soybean farming and rice
>>farming.
>
>He has no less argument

He has produced no argument at all Goober. Not a single example to back up
his claim.